The Rumour Thread

[cyrus]

1 hour ago, Nezzhil said:

Not exactly. We know that Gobsprakk is helping Kragnos to find their kin, but the text have hints that Gobsprakk could be using Kragnos as a weapon and all is a lie to provoke the rage of the God.

There is more than this 😉

[Jagged Red Lines]

Gotta say I hope we have mini centaur faction. Kraggy looks so out of place in almost every destruction army.

Would love to see full units of dragon ogor-sized centaurs. Some with bows, some with spears. Centaurs riding centaurs etc.

[Vasshpit]

Just now, Jagged Red Lines said:

Centaurs riding centaurs etc

HUMAN CENTAUR-PEDE!!!

[KriticalKhan]

To continue the long string of "make Kragnos better" suggestions, I think he would have benefited from alternate build options that let you put faction-specific trinkets and iconography on him (ironjawz armor, gutplates and maw symbols for ogres, etc.). Maybe some theming stuff for the base. Obviously, people can do that themselves with left-over bits from their own armies, but a lot of hobbyists I know are allergic to anything that isn't in a GW-approved instruction manual, and it would have shown they actually considered Kragnos to be a cross-faction centerpiece, rather than some guy who looks like he got lost on the way to the BoC book

[MitGas]

1 hour ago, KriticalKhan said:

To continue the long string of "make Kragnos better" suggestions, I think he would have benefited from alternate build options that let you put faction-specific trinkets and iconography on him (ironjawz armor, gutplates and maw symbols for ogres, etc.). Maybe some theming stuff for the base. Obviously, people can do that themselves with left-over bits from their own armies, but a lot of hobbyists I know are allergic to anything that isn't in a GW-approved instruction manual, and it would have shown they actually considered Kragnos to be a cross-faction centerpiece, rather than some guy who looks like he got lost on the way to the BoC book

I might get some hate for this but to me Kragnos was a horrible concept right from the start anyways, one of the worst things GW put out in years. The mini doesn‘t look the part and it doesn‘t even look good, the sudden introduction wasn‘t good (would‘ve been better to tease him longer) and destruction has a lot of cooler centrepiece models that actually fit into the respective styles and compete with him. I dunno what they thought. It‘s not like Order has one big bad (big good?) either, so it‘s not needed, despite Nagash and Archaon. 

[Taerg Ad Ywons]

For faction centerpieces, 100% Kragnos would've been better suited to Chaos. Some primal centigor primogenitor/firstborn of a godbeast being freed would make the beastmen kinda relevant again. I think Destruction got Kragnos as there's only four factions under its umbrella, same with Death, and while Death has big centrepiece models, they also have the capstone in Nagash. Destruction has faction leads, but no Alliance lead. With Chaos, this is Archaon. Order...doesn't really have an Alliance leader, but most factions have a faction lead barring of course, the wave 1 armies that are yet to be properly fleshed out.

What's done is done, but a giant elemental or idol could've worked for Destruction- a literal embodiment of the realms destructive energy designed to tear down civilisation. Make it Titled, not Named, so the lore can justify a) cross-faction support and b) more than one showing up.

[Infernalslayer]

20 minutes ago, MitGas said:

I might get some hate for this but to me Kragnos was a horrible concept right from the start anyways, one of the worst things GW put out in years. The mini doesn‘t look the part and it doesn‘t even look good, the sudden introduction wasn‘t good (would‘ve been better to tease him longer) and destruction has a lot of cooler centrepiece models that actually fit into the respective styles and compete with him. I dunno what they thought. It‘s not like Order has one big bad (big good?) either, so it‘s not needed, despite Nagash and Archaon. 

Kragnos was also one of the biggest kicks in the face of Beasts of Chaos, who have been begging for new miniatures for years. Him and the Ogroid Theridons of Slaves to Darkness 😅

[Taerg Ad Ywons]

The theridons I can understand as Chaos Ogres have been a thing for a long while, but they definitely could've been ported to Beasts as a less killy, but better armoured, minotaur.

[Infernalslayer]

2 minutes ago, Taerg Ad Ywons said:

The theridons I can understand as Chaos Ogres have been a thing for a long while, but they definitely could've been ported to Beasts as a less killy, but better armoured, minotaur.

Slaves to Darkness definitely deserved to get chaos ogres back. I would have preferred if their ogres were more humanoid like the one from the Iron Golems unit. The Theridons look great but there is a big design overlap with the beastmen esthetic. I held one of the theridon heads in my hand before assembling it and the head looked like an enlarged Ungor face without the big horns.

[Ejecutor]

38 minutes ago, MitGas said:

I might get some hate for this but to me Kragnos was a horrible concept right from the start anyways, one of the worst things GW put out in years. The mini doesn‘t look the part and it doesn‘t even look good, the sudden introduction wasn‘t good (would‘ve been better to tease him longer) and destruction has a lot of cooler centrepiece models that actually fit into the respective styles and compete with him. I dunno what they thought. It‘s not like Order has one big bad (big good?) either, so it‘s not needed, despite Nagash and Archaon. 

In fact, imo, all this Kragnos introduction bring us another center piece that looks way better and more cohesive for the Stormcast. Krondys and Karazai.

[Luperci]

49 minutes ago, MitGas said:

I might get some hate for this but to me Kragnos was a horrible concept right from the start anyways, one of the worst things GW put out in years. The mini doesn‘t look the part and it doesn‘t even look good, the sudden introduction wasn‘t good (would‘ve been better to tease him longer) and destruction has a lot of cooler centrepiece models that actually fit into the respective styles and compete with him. I dunno what they thought. It‘s not like Order has one big bad (big good?) either, so it‘s not needed, despite Nagash and Archaon. 

GW gotta make more money out of their big centrepiece minis. Just be glad they didn't make a big flying green orruk apparition of gorkamorka or something similar I suppose. They can give kragnos more lore and give him his own faction which would help, I don't think his design is that bad beyond saving.

[madmac]

48 minutes ago, Luperci said:

GW gotta make more money out of their big centrepiece minis. Just be glad they didn't make a big flying green orruk apparition of gorkamorka or something similar I suppose. They can give kragnos more lore and give him his own faction which would help, I don't think his design is that bad beyond saving.

His unfortunate face aside, I think the Kragnos model looks great. I love the celtic stylings with his armor in particular. He doesn't fit with destruction at all visually, unforunately, but that doesn't make him unsalvageable. Bring on more centaurs, I say.

[Lucentia]

I think using Broken Realms to establish Kragnos as a player in the same sort of league as Morathi/Teclis/Belakor was a pretty savvy and clever move, but then his actual background and plot relevance was a big fumble in my eyes (But, then again, I don't hold a lot of warhammer lore stuff in super high regard beyond the broad strokes and occasional fun detail, so I don't know that my view counts for much there.)  The model I think is basically fine if uninspiring, but that style of cross-faction piece never really works for me cos it breaks the shared aesthetic cohesion that really make a warhammer army pop on the table, same reason I'll never really run allied units in my lists.

 

[Mutton]

I'm a die-hard Destruction player, and I actually like Kragnos. He needs better lore than just "argh, me angry, me smash," but at least he's an attempt at something more creative for the Destro alliance. 

Even I'm sick of seeing the exact same orcs/gobbos/giants/etc. we've been inundated with for decades.

Kragnos 9/10, Lore 3/10.

[KingBrodd]

21 minutes ago, Mutton said:

I'm a die-hard Destruction player, and I actually like Kragnos. He needs better lore than just "argh, me angry, me smash," but at least he's an attempt at something more creative for the Destro alliance. 

Even I'm sick of seeing the exact same orcs/gobbos/giants/etc. we've been inundated with for decades.

Kragnos 9/10, Lore 3/10.

The fact that Ogors have only 2 named Characters for Gutbusters and BCR respectively and we have almost no lore on them and zero minis is a travesty.

I really hope 4.0 introduces at least one of them!!

[Vasshpit]

27 minutes ago, Mutton said:

Kragnos 9/10, Lore 3/10.

Opposite here. There's some great developments in DB3. Like for example (not a spoiler) when Kragnos and Gobsprakk are talking Kragnos is actually well spoken and not just a dumb brute. There's other bits from other named characters that give him more foundation and even not being a fan of him I felt sympathy for his tragic backstory. Events are also laid out that really emphasize that order are not always the "good guys".

I'm curious to see how this unfolds and of course to see how the bog boyz play their part in all of it. 

Also he's just a big centaur sooo not like it's really anything all that new and exciting imo. 

[Taerg Ad Ywons]

Kragnos: "Excuse me old chum, but you do appear to be squatting in the remains of my ancestral home. I am quite incensed at this and will, of course, trample you underfoot. I hope this does not inconvenience you and I offer my sincerest apologies"

*Earthquakes happen, everyone dies. Reroll your character, Sigmar*

Daughters of Khaine and Idoneth to a lesser degree embody 'order' as in 'My order'/hierarchies  whereas other order factions are generally like 'civil society is tight!'

[Keleath]

9 hours ago, Infernalslayer said:

Slaves to Darkness definitely deserved to get chaos ogres back. 

I disagree. According to the lore (Ogors battletome v2, Soulbound, brokenrealms Morathi…) it's the Hedonites of Slaanesh who should have corrupt Ogors. 
 

from Soulbound Champion of Destruction:

The method by which they acquire food rarely matters, and many Ogors have no compunctions about accepting work from Sigmar, only to serve in Archaon's armies immediately after. That being said, there are some lines that most Ogors won't cross. Their obsession with eating means Ogors are particularly vulnerable to corruption by Slaanesh, but these fallen hedonists are looked upon with scorn and suspicion by the rest. Mercenary work is one thing, but giving up the Mawpath forever and shackling oneself to a weak god is quite another.

Edited November 5, 2023 by Keleath

[KingBrodd]

2 hours ago, Keleath said:

I disagree. According to the lore (Ogors battletome v2, Soulbound, brokenrealms Morathi…) it's the Hedonites of Slaanesh who should have corrupt Ogors. 
 

from Soulbound Champion of Destruction:

The method by which they acquire food rarely matters, and many Ogors have no compunctions about accepting work from Sigmar, only to serve in Archaon's armies immediately after. That being said, there are some lines that most Ogors won't cross. Their obsession with eating means Ogors are particularly vulnerable to corruption by Slaanesh, but these fallen hedonists are looked upon with scorn and suspicion by the rest. Mercenary work is one thing, but giving up the Mawpath forever and shackling oneself to a weak god is quite another.

This. I love that Ogors and well basically all of Destruction, cannot or will not fall to Chaos as its considered Weak.

[Ejecutor]

4 hours ago, Keleath said:

I disagree. According to the lore (Ogors battletome v2, Soulbound, brokenrealms Morathi…) it's the Hedonites of Slaanesh who should have corrupt Ogors. 
 

from Soulbound Champion of Destruction:

The method by which they acquire food rarely matters, and many Ogors have no compunctions about accepting work from Sigmar, only to serve in Archaon's armies immediately after. That being said, there are some lines that most Ogors won't cross. Their obsession with eating means Ogors are particularly vulnerable to corruption by Slaanesh, but these fallen hedonists are looked upon with scorn and suspicion by the rest. Mercenary work is one thing, but giving up the Mawpath forever and shackling oneself to a weak god is quite another.

I always have this inner debate about Role books. Are they considered canon/ lore 100%? Are they checked by the black library team? Asking from the lack of knowledge.

[Chikout]

3 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:

I always have this inner debate about Role books. Are they considered canon/ lore 100%? Are they checked by the black library team? Asking from the lack of knowledge.

Yes they are canon. Several black library writers contributed to them. That said black library itself doesn't necessarily follow the lore exactly. They have a certain amount of freedom to create their own things. I think the RPGs are actually more closely controlled by GW. 

[Keleath]

1 minute ago, Ejecutor said:

I always have this inner debate about Role books. Are they considered canon/ lore 100%? Are they checked by the black library team? Asking from the lack of knowledge.

Yes, they are canon/lore.

For the example I gave about Ogors and the fact that they're prone to joining the ranks of the HoS, you can find the same information in the Ogors v2 battletome.

[EntMan]

Annoying 2 week pre-orders. I'm impatient for my new stick men and bugs!

What are we expecting in the Week in Warhammer article today?

[Someravella]

11 hours ago, Mutton said:

I'm a die-hard Destruction player, and I actually like Kragnos. He needs better lore than just "argh, me angry, me smash," but at least he's an attempt at something more creative for the Destro alliance. 

Even I'm sick of seeing the exact same orcs/gobbos/giants/etc. we've been inundated with for decades.

Kragnos 9/10, Lore 3/10.

I do not like that the lore for Destruction factions in GW are often simplified to "we do not like civilisation and we only want to break things". Imo, they do not have a proper reason to be that way.

At the end, Destruction consists of those mythological creatures that do not fit Death, Chaos or Order (orcs, trolls, ogres, goblins, etc.).

Edited November 5, 2023 by Someravella

[Infernalslayer]

5 hours ago, Keleath said:

I disagree. According to the lore (Ogors battletome v2, Soulbound, brokenrealms Morathi…) it's the Hedonites of Slaanesh who should have corrupt Ogors. 
 

from Soulbound Champion of Destruction:

The method by which they acquire food rarely matters, and many Ogors have no compunctions about accepting work from Sigmar, only to serve in Archaon's armies immediately after. That being said, there are some lines that most Ogors won't cross. Their obsession with eating means Ogors are particularly vulnerable to corruption by Slaanesh, but these fallen hedonists are looked upon with scorn and suspicion by the rest. Mercenary work is one thing, but giving up the Mawpath forever and shackling oneself to a weak god is quite another.

Chaos ogres have been established as part of the undivided chaos hordes in Warhammer fantasy for decades.

That said i would welcome them in the ranks of Slaanesh.

My favorite chaos ogors were the ones being corrupted by Nurgle, in the army of Tamurkhan. What a beautiful monstrous army, filled with nurgle trolls, ogors and giant putrid toads 🥰

Pity it suffered the fate of Forgeworld AOS armies.